On March 10 of this year Pride Toronto (PT) released a notice regarding the Pride Parade stating "Participating groups must agree ... to have their messages and signage approved by the ethics committee of Pride Toronto in advance of the event." Due to public outcry, PT reversed its decision saying that it would no longer be vetting content before the parade. Sadly the victory was short lived.
From the beginning it was clear to members of Queers Against Israeli Apartheid (QuAIA) that PT's attempt to control messaging was related to them. Last year, after marching in 2008, it was suggested that QuAIA be banned from the parade. Funders, supporters and PT got nervous. In a letter reviewing a conversation that the City of Toronto had with PT, Executive Director of Culture for the City of Toronto stated, "A review will be made as to whether they can ban a group on the basis of being called 'Queers Against Israeli Apartheid.'"
Formed in 2008 during Toronto's Israeli Apartheid Week, QuAIA has worked to draw attention to the Palestinian cause, calling out those who may defend Israel's actions due to their (limited) support of gay rights and illustrates the ways in which race, statehood and sexuality are interrelated. This rubbed many people the wrong way including Toronto mayoral candidate Giorgio Mammoliti who helped reignite the issue by putting forward a motion for the City to de-fund Pride—a move that made PT scared again, considering that if the motion passes on June 14 it would mean a loss of over $200 000 in cash and in-kind city services to PT.
In light of the threat to funding, the PT board in a four-to-three decision banned the use of the phrase "Israeli Apartheid" from the parade, thus for all intents and purposes banning QuAIA from participating. With this move it seems PT has put the future of Pride in greater peril than just the possible loss of income. In an open letter to PT, founders of Pride have called on PT to rescind the ban, stating, "This sets a very dangerous precedent for the exclusion of certain political perspectives within our movements and communities from Pride events."
A generous reading of PT's decision and even Edmonton Pride Week Society's decision last year to give parade title sponsorship to TD Trust (something the group has not repeated this year) suggests that groups are accepting money with strings attached, implicit or otherwise, to ensure that they will be able to provide ever-lasting positive experiences for those that they think they are serving.
Most LGBT endeavors, like Pride, start with the mission to improve lives. Quickly the pressure to grow and succeed becomes distractionary. Suddenly mandates can be corrupted by outcomes and supposed community expectations, resulting in knee jerk reactions to continue and get bigger. Unquestioned growth in the modern queer context creates over-simplified fabled ideals around a monolithic LGBT community and while there is a possibility of a greater majority being served due to growth, how are some being excluded? Who needs Pride more? Straight people? Enshrined prosperous gays? Or marginalized queers navigating an often subtly yet undeniably violently oppressive world?
In reality, immigration, discrimination and patriarchy are all real battles being waged by queers everyday in Canada. Is Pride with its roots in activism, acting around current issues or is it just leveraging its past success to act now as a vehicle of the marketplace? What LGBT organizations, including Pride, should be considering is: who benefits from growth and how can growth corrupt once noble intentions?
Locally as Edmonton Pride continues to grow there is an evolving feeling that it is becoming less accessible for some, both physically and culturally. In the end, support, sponsorship, nor the threat of losing either, should overly impact LGBTQ endeavors. Sure money matters, growth has it benefits, but in the end neither should not be the factor that reigns on our parade.
No comments:
Post a Comment